MrsFlipFlops

I had a two and a half week break, then it started up again, and it is HEAVY! Like, changing tampons EVERY HOUR! Crazy. So, after getting annoyed of going to Walgreens practically every day, I went to costco and got me MAJOR boxes of tampons and pads. I'm pretty sure I have a three month supply. (Embarassingly enough, on my way out the door, I saw my boss's boss... so bad, but who cares, I have a BOATLOAD!) :smile2: Good luck slim... I feel ya.

Hi Mr Boswell! Welcome.

Donna- that's true. But to add to that, the responsibility of living in a society means that the people have to assign values to behaviors. Else, everyone is free to do as their individual "truth" dictates. I believe relativism should be applied on an individual level, which dictates we determine what is true for ourselves. But on a societal level it would never function. So the question is, how does a society dictate what they believe their "truths" to be? Is it done by vote? By judges? By a ruler? By a previously stated document? I'm not being facetious about this, I'm really curious about everyone's thoughts.

Besides, science hasn't proven what makes a person gay. Maybe there is something physiologically different as some theories suggest. Some theories also suggest murderers have physiological differences. It doesn't make me want to redefine what it means to kill. I've already addressed the race issue, but you seem to have issues with it. A black MAN can marry a white WOMAN, a black WOMAN can marry an asian MAN. I didn't realize this was so complicated. Gender is what DEFINES marriage to be what it is. Without man and woman, marriage becomes genderless.

Nanook- your post makes me sad. You claim to be accepting of people, yet what you seem to really mean is that you are only accepting of people who believe what you do.

I've thought about this thread for several days. I will try to keep the sarcasm out of this post, because isn't that the problem with online posts? You can't hear my voice, just like I read into people's messages their tone. It's never my intention to make someone feel persecuted. Ready, no, I do not know what it's like to be gay in this world and I never will. I can see from my own experiences as an outsider to that topic looking in that it is a struggle. I do know what it's like to feel persecuted for reasons I will not go into here, so I can understand the sentiment. I can relate to being stuck in a situation where my life was threatened for what I believe. So while I will never completely understand what it's like to be gay, I can empathize and attempt to. Also, in regards to when I said people resort to name calling, it wasn't directed to you. Although you do appear to me to be very condescending. I appreciate your previous post, ReadySteady. I do. However, I could have posted the same thing. I feel like you don't understand and that in time you will. I can't make you understand, you're limited by your experiences and I get that. (See how condescending you come off? "No offense") I didn't pick and choose what to debate. I felt I had covered all your reasons by giving the quote that stated civil unions will have all the rights and privileges associated with traditional marriages. I didn't know I needed to copy and paste every topic you mentioned. Still though, pensions are something determined by the company who grants them. Sometimes they grant full benefits to spouses, many already include benefits to domestic partners. A brother and sister COULD get married if we changed the definition of marriage. According to the definition that's the LGBT community wants to force on society, the folks who would like to marry their relatives should be very excited. My argument here and every where else I've posted in any board is that we have obligations as citizens and members of our communities to weigh pros and cons of every topic and live that way. I'm glad some people here believe what they do because they've thought about it, pondered it. Whether you agree with me or not, I'm proud of anyone who at leasts thinks about it. As far as "comparing" homosexuality to pedophelia or incest... well, I have two thoughts. I'm sure the pedophiles feel discriminated against too. But that doesn't make you want to change the age of consent, does it? Secondly, if I relate that in my mind, you can see how serious of a situation I take this. Instead of everyone saying I'm making comparisons, perhaps they should consider the gravity of our actions. It's not that I don't like gay people and I want to restrict them somehow, it's that I don't agree with homosexual marriage. Just like every one here has something they don't agree with, be it death penalty or abortion, taxes or the bailout. I have the right to believe what I believe and voice my opinion about that belief. I have the right to vote my belief. Just like everyone here does. I don't think pro gay marriage people are "intolerant" because they want to change the definition of marriage for everyone. I know they are just voting their own conscience, just like I am mine. I believe in equal rights and privileges. Besides agreeing that marriage is not a "right" per se, more like a social more (that's moray). However, a man can marry a woman if they want the bundle of goodies associated with it. No one is excluding any ONE or GROUP of people. Regardless of race, gender, religion a MAN can marry a WOMAN. That's the definition of marriage. Keith Obermann annoyed me. Since when did all our news become editorial? Obnoxious. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_ZvPR09N4Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_ZvPR09N4Q[/ame] This woman has the same rights as gay people. She can stand on a street corner, yet somehow, this little old woman, who is simply standing for her beliefs just like the hundreds of people behind her, gets assaulted. Bold move by the LGBT community.

Ready- I wasn't comparing your relationship to that of a goat, etc... I was examining other possibilities. However, you did seem to skip the "Can I marry my sister?" question. Convenient. Secondly, people in America can choose to get married, everyone can... a man to a woman and a woman to a man. If you want to be married and get those discounts, a woman can find a man and marry him for the tax benefits. You can do that under our law. You just don't get those "perks" if women finds a woman to "marry". The people have now spoken TWICE, which is more significant than a 4-3 judicial ruling. I feel like I've said everything I feel like saying about this topic. I get annoyed when people are narrowminded and try to thrust their labelistic views on everyone and refuse to have a conversation. Instead, some have resorted to sarcasatic comments and name calling. That's not helpful. It just means that you have nothing of substance to back up your claims. I have beliefs that do not include homosexual "marriages". That doesn't make me intolerant, it makes me human. I've taken a topic, weighed the pros and cons, and made a decision. Like we all should do as citizens.

Sunnyside- I'm learning more and more every day. I have been hearing about and reading about people who are moving away from the US for financial reasons. What made you decide on Malaysia and how did you go about making that huge move?

Yeah, I appreciate the comment of "Wow, you're looking terrific recently." But the comment of "You've lost a TON of weight, I mean really!" is just bad. Seriously? a TON? Come on!

I think I may go in to see someone. That's a real hard step to make. It's just so bizarre how much of an emotional journey this weight loss thing is. I feel like I've spent more emotional energy than I have physical energy!! I went in for a fill today, and it just felt so good to be able to sit and talk to people about it, and to find they feel the same way. Bloo- there are also local agencies where you can pay a sliding scale if you feel like you'd like to meet with a counselor. You can access them by calling 211 from a land line, or looking up United Way in your area. They maintain a book of agencies, fees, and services. Congrats on your weight loss though! I can't imagine getting to the two's, but I am encouraged that it can happen!

Fanny- I agree. I suppose it's the ones from family we remember the most. My parents are great people who meant well, and I do consider myself to be very close to them. My dad has never really made comments about my weight. My mom on the other hand, my sisters and I just ignore her and those types of comments. She and my aunt will discuss some health food kick, like eating raw, or only eating things with certain ingredients... it's a never ending show of unhealthy fad after another... and she will say "I wish my girls would eat this, but they don't touch anything green." For the love! She doesn't see us eat! How in the world does she know what we eat? I think she just likes being the one who knows it all, and wants the attention from my aunt. It's like she wants my aunt to think, "Oh, goodness, your girls are so fat and unhealthy, if only they followed us." It's like the old women talking on the porch about youngun's. I'm glad you have such a supportive family. I have been lucky to have a husband very supportive. He, like Kimmy's fiance, loved me when I was fat, proposed when I was fatter, pulled me off the couch during surgery, and constantly tells me I'm beautiful no matter what size I am.

The reason is not so simple to explain as it begins with the start of our existence on earth, our purpose, our functions as genders, our goals, etc... You're asking me to put a series of novels into one paragraph, which I cannot do. However, I'll try. It redefines marriage for society, with a definition I do not agree with. That alone undermines the sanctity of my marriage. I don't want my children (which I do not yet have) learning that a gay relationship is the same as a marriage. (BTW, CA law can require kindergarteners to learn the concept of marriage in schools Education Code § 51890).There cannot be two marriages. My marriage is not the same as a homosexual relationship. Mine is previously defined, and yes, I believe, one that is defined by God. If we redefine it, marriage becomes genderless. Marriage is essential to society. The unit of a family is important, one that keeps our children grounded, historically better citizens, off drugs, away from teen pregnancy. The definition of marriage has been used for thousands of years. Yet now people want to change it for the attractions of a few. I believe a child is ideally born into a stable family with a mother and a father, as we know children need both gender influences. This is not to diminish familes that have different situations due to death or divorce or illness or what not. As for the racism aspect, again, as I said before... and to mimic your words "that's ridiculous." Again, the definition of marriage is one between a MAN and a WOMAN. He is a man, I am a woman. It has never been defined as a union between a white man and a white woman, or a black man and a black woman. In addition, we didn't get married for legal benefits, tax purposes, or for the discounts we allegedly are entitled to. For me, the legality wasn't ever the point. We took vows in front of friends, family, and God. Gays are free to do the same if they like. It just shouldn't be labeled as a marriage. The point of the law here is to define and determine appropropriate behavior, just like we've defined stealing and murder and determined what's appopriate. No one is interested in arresting all the gay people and plopping them in jail (unlike the racial laws in the south). Same gender attraction does not allow for society to continue. And no, I don't believe the only reason to get married is to make babies but the concept supports my belief (and the reason that we're all here today- your birth took two genders to create). If the only way to perpetuate the species is between opposing genders, then is is contrary to nature to have two same gender beings together as that would be the end of the species. Rationally, why would it be okay to have a committment that stops the species from existing? .... Why don't we live in the bottom of the ocean? Because we weren't designed that way. Why do same gender relationships not produce more members of society. Because we weren't designed that way. I don't believe the world is overpopulated, so that argument doesn't work with me. I think we should be better stewards of our resources- but that there are enough resources for many more people. Animals everywhere have a common purpose in mind, to not go extinct. It's embedded into us. Even gay couples can agree, they want babies too. To raise someone, to leave a piece of themselves on the earth and to continue their species. Unfortunately, we, by nature, were not designed to do it with someone of the same gender.

I'm glad this thread got resurrected. :eek: I LOVE it! Comments from parents hurt a lot. When I was 12ish, my dad was mentioning that I needed to lose weight (never mind that I wasn't obese, just about 20 pounds overweight) and I said "What? Boys love curves!" And he said "Not those kinds of curves." Sting ola!

Allright, I'm finally in the 2's so I figured I would post some before and during pics. The first two are before, then in May. The last (with the white shirt) is this week... I'm 299! Thanks everyone for posting and keeping me motivated!

To clarify, since it seems not many are very educated about the issue, or the proposition... First, Prop 8 contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” It's not an attack on gays or how they choose to live. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, “domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married spouses. (Family Code § 297.5.) Proposition 8 WILL NOT change this. You may still visit your loved one in the hospital. Secondly, the proposition does not seek to nullify any of the 18,000 marriages already performed. The victory for prop 8 is the definition of marriage. Call it civil union or domestic partnership. It's not a marriage. Thirdly, as far as park discounts and car insurance rates, that's really something you should take up with the companies that you use, not the law. I don't like paying more because of the car I drive either, but I don't seek to change the definition of an SUV. It's about changing a law to meet the needs of few people. It would seem ludicrous to all of us here for a man to attempt to change age of consent because he fell in love with a 7 year old. Or for a thief to change the definition of robbery because he was unsatisfied with how society, or tax benefits, or what not viewed him. If it's all about symbolism and being recognized by God or what not, no earthly legal label makes a difference in any of that. If we define marriage as a committment between any two consenting adults, why stop there? Why do they have to consent? Why do they need to be adults? Are they just human adults or are we talking all types of adults? Adult goats (as I read in the paper the other day about a man who loved his goat in that fashion.) Can I marry my sister? We're two consenting adults. No! The law of the land is that marriage is defined by a union between a man and a woman. Period. End of story. I can understand that this is an emotional issue. I get that. And I don't mean to make emotions seem unimportant or belittle anyone in any way. (Which is why you won't hear me saying "I don't care what you think." and blah, because I do care what you think, otherwise I wouldn't be posting here) People think that by protesting on the streets, or by making a big fuss over what's now been passed TWICE by voters (which I think should have more sway than 4 judges, it was a 4-3 vote BTW, not a big victory by any means) that it's going to change. It's not. Gay and lesbian people will fight, but for once, and I'm so proud... we're fighting back. I'm not going to be shoved into a corner and labeled a homophobe or discriminatory. I don't believe I'm either of those. I know gay people, I'm related to gay people. I love them. My position has and always will be the same. To me, this isn't a religious issue like the world wants to make it. It's a moral issue, yes- just like any other issue- abortion, death penalty, redistribution of wealth. But it's also an issue that I feel very strongly about. As for the argument of what happens behind closed doors, believe me, I do not care, nor do I want to hear about it. However, we're not talking about what happens in private, we're talking about what is paraded around in society. I have always believed in defining a marriage between a man and a woman. This prop 8 thing has made me think more deeply and I realized that I need to be more vocal about MY beliefs and MY rights. Although I won't speak without thinking and taking into consideration the words I'm saying, I won't be silent anymore for fear of hurting someone's feelings. And if you really believe what you preach, then you should be tolerant towards me and my beliefs. Somehow by having a different opinion, I'm intolerant. But to those who agree with me: we can't let that hold us back any more. If you're against gay marriage, take a stand and be active in the cause. Don't let them scare you or bully you. Again, I don't have malice or hate in my heart against anyone. I love my gay friends and relatives and will always love them. And we will continue to disagree about this fundamental topic. But at what point will people move on and accept the law of the land?

I loved original post! So TRUE! Did you see the youtube video about the woman at the Obama rally who said "when obama is elected I won't have to pay my gas, or my mortgage"? We're going to have some disappointed folks in a few months.

Actually, before it was legal, the PEOPLE voted NO to gay marriage, then four judges took the decision away from the PEOPLE. Prop 8 was putting it back where it should be, with citizens voting. Again, the people have spoken, yet gay activists everywhere think their own opinions should outrank the people's opinions. The only way it passed was because it was taken out of the hands of the people and passed on to the government. The only way it will pass again is if Californians allow activists to bypass voters yet again.

If they feel God is okay with it, then some legal label doesn't matter. Perhaps they need the legal label to justify their own actions.

I hear ya Dolphin! I think today is the last of my period, which is ultra exciting.

Where in the constitution does it say we have a right to be married? Besides, prop 8 isn't about denying rights, if you read more information you'll find that the CA constitution provides for civil union rights between same sex couples. Why does it need to be called marriage?

Here's what I don't understand though, and perhaps someone can share their views... In my mind, there is something biologically wrong with being gay/lesbian because if everyone were gay/lesbian, humankind would cease to exist. If nature had intended for same sex people to be together, it would have made it possible for same sex people to reproduce, since we have this internal drive to keep living and what not. I also do not understand how believing against gay marriage makes me intolerant. I'm not speaking anger against anyone, yet somehow I'm a demon because I have a different view. Interracial marriage, again, is a MAN with a WOMAN. Capable of reproduction, man and woman.

I'm shocked that a judge would OVERRULE the people in gay marriage, and that Califonians accepted it! Clearly CA people didn't want gay marriage when they voted, then judges overruled it... and as we're seeing today (although the numbers are too close to call just quite yet) clearly there is STILL a LARGE group of people who oppose gay marriage. I believe in the true and original definition of marriage between a man and a woman.

Both good points. I just know I'm driving my husband crazy. Poor guy doesn't even know how to respond!

You're so right on about the feeling like a woman thing. Who knew that a period had so much power?!

With the exception of a few posts, I just would like to point out that a lot of your posters have started your sentence with something similar to "Many years ago, my EX and I..." or "My exhusband wanted..." Just thinking, if threesomes weren't possibly (again, not saying 100%) destructive, why are there so many exes involved? We all have our own choices to make in our lives and decide what's best for ourselves. But I would think that having a threesome within your marriage should be carefully thought out. Just my two cents.